Campbell v. State
Citations
- 2025 ND 152
Syllabus
Under the Strickland test, an applicant claiming ineffective assistance of counsel must prove two elements: (1) that their counsel's representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness and (2) that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different. Courts need not analyze both elements of the Strickland test and should resolve the case by addressing a single prong when possible. Under N.D.C.C. § 29-32.1-01(1)(e), postconviction relief is available when evidence, not previously presented and heard, exists requiring vacation of the conviction or sentence in the interest of justice. Applications based on newly discovered evidence are reviewed as a motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence under N.D.R.Crim.P. 33. To prevail on a motion for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence, the defendant must show: (1) the evidence was discovered after trial, (2) the failure to learn about the evidence at the time of trial was not the result of the defendant's lack of diligence, (3) the newly discovered evidence is material to the issues at trial, and (4) the weight and quality of the newly discovered evidence would likely result in an acquittal. A motion for new trial based on newly discovered evidence rests within the discretion of the trial court, and we will not reverse the court's denial of the motion unless the court has abused its discretion.
Judges: Jensen, Jon J.
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
3 cases in this archive cite this case.
Cites
32 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court· 1984-06-25· cited 123,578×
- Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court· 1963-05-13· cited 33,902×
- Waller v. GeorgiaSupreme Court· 1984-05-21· cited 2,166×
- Deck v. MissouriSupreme Court· 2005-05-23· cited 1,034×
- State v. SteffesNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 1993-05-26· cited 72×
- Garcia v. StateNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2004-04-13· cited 64×
- State v. TriebNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 1982-02-11· cited 54×
- DeCoteau v. StateNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 1998-11-19· cited 40×
- Mertz v. StateNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 1995-07-27· cited 34×
- Knoff v. American Crystal Sugar Co.North Dakota Supreme Court· 1986-01-07· cited 30×
- State v. PattersonNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2014-10-28· cited 28×
- Damron v. StateNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2003-06-17· cited 26×
- State v. AabrekkeNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2011-07-13· cited 26×
- Noorlun v. StateNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2007-07-25· cited 25×
- State v. SchlickenmayerNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 1985-03-13· cited 20×
- Brewer v. StateNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2019-03-13· cited 20×
- State v. AgueroNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2010-11-09· cited 20×
- State v. MartinezNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2021-03-24· cited 17×
- Kovalevich v. StateNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2018-07-18· cited 16×
- Rourke v. StateNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2018-06-05· cited 14×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.